From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Oct  2 07:27:01 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA28217
          for questions-outgoing; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 07:27:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cdale3.midwest.net (root@cdale3.midwest.net [204.248.40.16])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA28211
          for <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 07:26:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from agtech (ws2.c-ag.siu.edu [131.230.82.2])
	by cdale3.midwest.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA25769;
	Thu, 2 Oct 1997 08:54:15 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <3433AF01.1578@midwest.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 09:26:09 -0500
From: bla bla <parrothd@midwest.net>
Reply-To: parrothd@midwest.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.02 (WinNT; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
CC: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: tty-level buffer overflows
References: <3.0.3.32.19971001225109.006e88f0@midwest.net> <19971002142420.49578@lemis.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Greg Lehey wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Oct 01, 1997 at 10:51:09PM -0500, Jonathan E. Lyons wrote:
> > Is this anything to be concerned about? I've got an X2 modem, with the port
> > speed set at 57600.....
> >
> >
> > Sep 28 16:42:11 cplkagan /kernel: sio0: 660 more tty-level buffer overflows
> > (total 660)
> > Sep 29 13:52:41 cplkagan /kernel: pid 18534 (ping), uid 0: exited on signal 3
> > Sep 30 21:05:02 cplkagan /kernel: sio0: 100 more tty-level buffer overflows
> > (total 760)
> > Sep 30 22:00:02 cplkagan /kernel: sio0: 198 more tty-level buffer overflows
> > (total 958)
> > Sep 30 22:05:01 cplkagan /kernel: sio0: 199 more tty-level buffer overflows
> > (total 1157)
> > Sep 30 22:05:02 cplkagan /kernel: sio0: 1076 more tty-level buffer
> > overflows (total 2233)
> > Oct  1 05:30:02 cplkagan /kernel: sio0: 940 more tty-level buffer overflows
> > (total 3173)
> 
> Yes.  With PPP, each of these means a lost packet, which is expensive.
> This shouldn't happen.  Is the machine slow or heavily loaded?
> Otherwise you might be losing interrupts.
> 
> Greg

	Depends on your version of slow,:), it's a 486/66 8megs of ram, running
ppp -alias, for a small house LAN. It does however has other processes
running, but whenever I do a top -s 1 about %90 of the machine is idle,
until someone starts to dl, or hits the Web server from the local LAN.
Could it be the serial ports itself? The board it self has one built-in
serial port, but I didn't think it could handle the speed(it's an old
Packard Hell MB) so I threw in a multi I/O card, trying to avoid serial
problems...

	Any suggestions? Besides a new MB(thats next semester)